Democratic Underground Latest Greatest Lobby Journals Search Options Help Login
Google

The Presidency is Authoritarian and Dictatorial. Abolish the Office!

Printer-friendly format Printer-friendly format
Printer-friendly format Email this thread to a friend
Printer-friendly format Bookmark this thread
This topic is archived.
Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 11:26 AM
Original message
The Presidency is Authoritarian and Dictatorial. Abolish the Office!
The office of the president should be abolished. The President of the United States, like the presidents of many other countries, has become authoritarian and dictatorial. The office has grown far too powerful, becoming a threat to liberty for American citizens and citizens of foreign nations alike. It is a power that attract tyrants, a power that the common people of the world should rightly fear and loathe.

We should substitute in its place a figurehead president who calls general elections, accepts the resignation of an outgoing prime minister and asks the leader of the party with the most seats in the House to form a new government after elections. We can even give him other duties, like finding lost puppies in national parks.

Real political power would rest with the Prime Minister, a stronger version of the House Speaker, and his cabinet, a stronger version of congressional committee chairmen. The government could be given a vote of no confidence by the full House at any time for reasons less severe than high crimes and misdemeanors.

While the constitutional system of separation of powers and checks an balances has served us well for 200 years, we should recognize that by now it does no longer. We have witness in a span of forty years, the two most abusive presidents in American history, Nixon and Bush the Frat Boy. Both acted lawlessly in a belief that the president is above the law. Congress was strong enough to do something about it the first time, but not the second. Historians will argue for decades about whether the failure to impeach and remove Bush or Cheney was a failure of strength or will.

Congress, as an institution, failed to learn the lesson of Watergate and related crimes. It failed to remain as vigilant in the thirty-five years since the downfall of one tyrannical president as they were at that time. It was completely unprepared to act against a new tyrant, even worse than the first.

While President Nixon spied on Americans illegally and set the power of the federal government against his political opponents, Mr. Bush has done that and more. In addition the the NSA spying program and politically motivated prosecutions of Democratic office holders, most notably former Alabama Governor Don Siegelman, Mr. Bush also lied the nation into an unnecessary war, giving false reasons for going to war when in fact there was no reason at all. Mr. Bush then proceeded to ineptly prosecute that war, which perhaps could never have been won but is now most certainly lost. In prosecuting the unnecessary war against Iraq, Mr. Bush neglected to prosecute necessary action in Afghanistan aimed at capturing the principle suspect in a series of terrorist attacks unleashed against America on September 11, 2001. That individual, Osama bin Laden, remains at large, as do most of his lieutenants. In violation of international treaties and agreements to which the United States is a party, Mr. Bush has approved torture of individuals detained in the so-called war on terror and arranged for the prosecution for several of these individuals under a court system that denies the defendants due process of law by any reasonable standard.

Mr. Bush has made bogus claims of executive privilege in an attempt to thwart congressional investigations of the abuse of the Justice Department and asserted nonexistent constitutional powers as commander-in-chief continue the lethal occupation of Iraq. He has issued "signing statements" to legislation unilaterally voiding all or parts of an act of Congress, something he has no power to do by any stretch of the imagination. He approved of the outing of an intelligence agent as part of a political vendetta and authorized the dismissal of US Attorneys for refusing to use their offices to pursue partisan political prosecutions.

Mr. Bush further threatens to take the nation to war against Iran, asserting he needs no congressional authorization to do so; Mr. Bush is negotiating with the government of Iraq to commit American resources to the occupation of Iraq and asserts that no congressional approval is necessary.

In all this, Mr. Bush, and in many cases Mr. Cheney as well, warrants impeachment and removal.

It is, of course, a red herring to point out that Mr. Bush is not so much a sitting president as a usurper. Whether elected rightfully or appointed by crooked Supreme Court justices in a judicial coup d'etat, Mr. Bush has acted outside the constitutional limits on presidential power; he is a tyrant who acts as a dictator.

And Congress has done nothing to stop these abuses of power. The presidency today stands not as the office limited in power under the system devised by Mr. Madison and others, but as a center of absolute power in a system envisioned by Mr. Addington.

That kind of power is to be feared. It must be caged. This situation cannot stand.

The system proposed here is not so radical as it may appear. There are still checks and balances. There is still an independent judiciary. The difference is that political power shall rest in the lower house of Congress. Many of the powers now afforded the president will go to the upper house (the Senate). This would include the right to veto legislation by a majority vote. The Senate would still have the right to approve appointments, although these appointments would be made by the Prime Minister, who is a member of the House of Representatives. Another possible duty for the Senate would be the oversight of US Attorneys, completely removing them from the political realm and assuring their independence from political pressure.

Overall, the Prime Minister and his cabinet can be dismissed by a majority vote in the House. Not only could the Prime Minister be be removed for lying the nation into war, but for an inept response to a natural disaster. This results not in an immediate change in power, but in general elections. The Prime Minister of the United States will be accountable to the House of Representatives as a whole and ultimately, to the people. A lack of transparency, which has been a hallmark of Bush's dictatorial style, would land the Prime Minister in hot water with the opposition, with members of his own party and should be enough to lead to the fall of the government.

The genius of the present system, and the reason it worked so well for so long, is that it is based on a fear of power. Power has now become concentrated in the executive branch. Accordingly, the presidency has become antithetical to democracy and liberty. That is the crisis we now face.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 12:53 PM
Response to Original message
1. Self-Kick
:bounce:
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 03:18 PM
Response to Original message
2. Another time around the block, driver.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
ihavenobias Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 06:15 PM
Response to Original message
3. Interesting food for thought
I'll have to read this one twice.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
2008 Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 07:27 PM
Response to Original message
4. k&r
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
WeDidIt Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 07:28 PM
Response to Original message
5. I disagree
A strong presidency has been the halmark of strength for the United States as a nation.

Rome was founded as a pure Republic, and see where it got them?

No, what needs to be done is for Cpongress to step up and restore the checks and balances built into the constitution. A weak Congress leads to a tyrannical presidency. In the long term, though, the constitution and the American people restore the balance.
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
Jack Rabbit Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 09:28 PM
Response to Reply #5
9. Dissenting

A strong presidency has been the halmark of strength for the United States as a nation.

The hallmark of our greatness is a system of checks and balances. It's gone. Power has been concentrated in the hands of the chief executive. As we've seen, this power is now able to spy on Americans citizens without a warrant, declare American citizens "enemy combatants" and deny them due process, abrogate treaties at will, and make treaties without congressional authorization. One of the greatest concerns at present is that Mr. Bush will take the nation into a third war with nothing resembling authorization.

(W)hat needs to be done is for Congress to step up and restore the checks and balances built into the constitution. A weak Congress leads to a tyrannical presidency. In the long term, though, the constitution and the American people restore the balance.

Which means impeaching and removing Bush and Cheney tomorrow morning, at the latest, before they start a war against Iran. Idoubt that's going to happen. The American people won't have the opportunity to restore any balance -- at least by normal means -- until November 4.

President Obama can ignore any agreement Mr. Bush makes on his own with the Iraqi government, but what is he going to do about a war that nobody but Bush and his neoconservative pals want, should they start one?

If Bush were the Prime Minister subject to the more democratic parliamentary system, he would have been given a dozen or more no confidence votes by now: For lying the nation into war; for failing to win that war or negotiating his way out of it; for failing to capture Osama bin Laden and his lieutenants (which I understood to be the purpose of the "war on terror"); for abrogating the Third and Fourth Geneva Conventions and the Convention against Torture; for blowing the cover of an intelligence agent; for permitting partisan prosecutions of political opponents; for warrantless spying on American citizens; for botching the relief effort in the face of Hurricane Katrina; and for failing to regulate housing markets, allowing disastrous levels of mortgage foreclosures and financial panic.

While much of the above warranted Mr. Bush's impeachment and removasl, sot all of did under our present system of government. It's a bit of a stretch to say that failing to catch Osama or botching federal disaster relief is a high crime or misdemeanor. Either is simply incompetence. However, it is standard operating procedure to force a Prime Minister and his cabinet to resign and face new general elections in the wake such monumental failures.

Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Monk Donating Member (271 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 07:34 PM
Response to Original message
6. put corporate in place of presidency and office and you got a deal
Edited on Wed May-14-08 07:36 PM by T Monk
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
T Monk Donating Member (271 posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 07:37 PM
Response to Reply #6
7. but abolish this president all you want
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
cynatnite Donating Member (1000+ posts) Send PM | Profile | Ignore Wed May-14-08 07:40 PM
Response to Original message
8. That's five minutes of my life I'll never get back n/t
Printer Friendly | Permalink |  | Top
 
DU AdBot (1000+ posts) Click to send private message to this author Click to view 
this author's profile Click to add 
this author to your buddy list Click to add 
this author to your Ignore list Sun May 05th 2024, 09:32 AM
Response to Original message
Advertisements [?]
 Top

Home » Discuss » Archives » General Discussion (1/22-2007 thru 12/14/2010) Donate to DU

Powered by DCForum+ Version 1.1 Copyright 1997-2002 DCScripts.com
Software has been extensively modified by the DU administrators


Important Notices: By participating on this discussion board, visitors agree to abide by the rules outlined on our Rules page. Messages posted on the Democratic Underground Discussion Forums are the opinions of the individuals who post them, and do not necessarily represent the opinions of Democratic Underground, LLC.

Home  |  Discussion Forums  |  Journals |  Store  |  Donate

About DU  |  Contact Us  |  Privacy Policy

Got a message for Democratic Underground? Click here to send us a message.

© 2001 - 2011 Democratic Underground, LLC